sPHENIX is a new detector at RHIC.

[Edward Kistenev <kistenev AT bnl.gov>]

John, you probably want to finish this process before collaboration meeting – 
what precludes two reviews/week. 
                        Edward

On Oct 26, 2017, at 10:04 AM, John Haggerty <haggerty AT bnl.gov> wrote:

Hello,

I have been in touch with the subsystem managers about this, but I thought I 
should let the wider sPHENIX world know that this will be starting soon.  The 
goal is to have a document the design in a series of presentations, and to 
remind ourselves what must be completed in the Conceptual Design Report.  It 
is a direct response to a recommendation of the Director's Review.

I'll be asking for help in conducting these reviews from within the 
collaboration, so please consider seriously requests from Jim, Don, or me.  
If you are interested in volunteering, please contact me.

> The charge to the CD-1 review of sPHENIX will almost certainly include the 
> question to the review committee:
>> Is the conceptual design technically sound and likely to meet the 
>> objectives of its scientific case?
> and the expectation will be that the CDR will be complete.
> Ed and I think that we can accomplish this in a way that actually benefits 
> us by convening a series of short reviews for each of the detector systems. 
>  The idea is that we have one morning each on TPC, EMCAL, HCAL, CalEl, and 
> T/DAQ with a largely technical committee of physicists and engineers, 
> including one "outside" person (i.e., not a member of the sPHENIX 
> collaboration).  I will chair the committee, and I will work with the L2 
> managers to select other members of the committee (nor more than 2 or 3 
> other physicists or engineers, in addition to the "outside" reviewer).
> I would like to use this process to complete the CDR so that it is ready 
> for a Director's Review in early CY2018 and a CD-1 review in spring of 
> 2018, so part of the job of the reviewers is to read carefully and make 
> *constructive* suggestions and corrections to the CDR.  We might want to 
> appoint one of the reviewers as a subsystem "godfather" who will help edit 
> the CDR.
> I propose the following schedule on Wednesday mornings (there are 
> relatively few meetings on Wednesday):
> Nov 1 HCAL
> Nov 8 EMCAL
> Nov 15 TPC and TPC electronics (we might need to go into the afternoon on 
> electronics)
> Nov 29 CalEl
> Dec 13 Trigger/DAQ + MBD
> The outcome of this process would then be a series of meetings with 
> technical slides, a review report, and a completed CDR by the beginning of 
> CY2018.  It seems feasible to me; many of you have almost all the slides 
> you need for this now, the CDR is in a pretty advanced state, and we can 
> use it also as a way to draw in more members of the collaboration.
> I actually don't think these reviews should be onerous... much of the 
> material has been shown multiple times, and having someone outside our 
> usual orbit look at our ideas might even prove useful.  I'll post this to 
> one of the sphenix lists, but I thought first I'd make sure the L2 managers 
> are ok with it, and this will test whether you read to the end. 


-- 
John Haggerty
email: haggerty AT bnl.gov
cell: 631 741 3358
_______________________________________________
sPHENIX-l mailing list
sPHENIX-l AT lists.bnl.gov
https://lists.bnl.gov/mailman/listinfo/sphenix-l